The dissertation is devoted to analysis of unified substantive legal and procedural rules regulating legal relations (contract and tort), which in one or another way relate to aviation objects, including aircrafts. It is found out that tendencies inherent to the private international air law (the “PrIAL”) is uniformity, creation of sui generis convention mechanisms, application of principles of jus naturale to regulate the legal relations and interpret the international treaties. Sources of unification in PrIAL are international treaties and conventions, judgments, academic researches, national law, customs of business practice. The Montreal Convention is the only normative basis for a passenger’s claim for compensation of damage caused during air transportation that establishes uniform rules of carrier responsibility. These rules provide that carrier is liable if it is “negligent” but not “in fault”. The concept of “negligence” includes a special duty of competence in cases where more than knowledge or ability is required, which, as a matter of expectation, must have a reasonable person. In PrIAL the notion of “negligence” is used in conjunction with the notion of “wrongful action or inaction”. The procedural rule res ipsa loquitur shall be applied when considering air damage disputes. The carrier is liable for damages to the passenger for physical injury and death resulting from an unexpected and unusual incident or circumstances external to the passenger, that is, an “accident” according to the Montreal Convention. The assessment of circumstances as an “accident” is carried out on the basis of the concept of “expected standard of carriage”, which is largely related to the passenger’s expectations of a careful and caring attitude to him by the carrier, that manifests itself in ensuring flight safety, assistance by the staff of the carrier to the passenger on board, during embarking or disembarking, etc. The lack of such care is an unusual and unexpected factor that, in the presence of external factors, may result in an accident. The “bodily injury” includes mental injury, which is compensable, only if it is connected with physical injury, preceded by it or occuring simultaneously with it or that had caused it. The carrier is liable for the damage caused to the passenger, if there is a causal link between the damage and carrier’s actions or inactivity that is mediated through the specific place of the passenger’s location. An accident may occur not only on board of the aircraft, but outside of it after establishment of the carrier’s control over the passenger. Uniform criteria for determining, whether a passenger is in the process of embarking or disembarking is allocation of an accident, the activity of the passenger, the process of passenger movement, control of the carrier over the passenger’s activity, the factor of accident time before the flight. The Montreal Convention applies only to disputes concerning the improper performance of a contract of carriage. Failure to perform international air transportation agreements due to cancellation or refuse to transport is governed by applicable national law. There are no unified liability rules of an operator. Correspondingly the rules of national law defined by the conflict of law rules are applied in case of damage on surface caused by an aircraft. Compensation of the damage by the carrier or operator is made due to aviation insurance that must include insurance of war and equivalent risks. Carrier liability insurance can be considered “adequate”, if it is carried out in amounts that meet the requirements of a limited conventional reimbursement under the Montreal Convention and the national legislation of the country to which the flight is carried out. The liability insurance of an operator to third parties on the surface is adequate, if, upon payment of compensation, the injured person will be able to restore his standard of living before the time of damage. A number of factors (high cost, the need for safe operation, proper operation and maintenance, aviation insurance, etc.) contributed to the conventional and non-conventional unification of the obligatory legal relationships. Uniform rules as to the form and content of the contracts, specific means of protection of creditor’s rights and a supranational register of international encumbrances have been created.
